transparency is key

---

The evaluation for San Diego County’s Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act (JJCPA) program is conducted by the SANDAG Criminal Justice Clearinghouse, as part of the cross-site evaluation for all

JJCPA programs across California.

The California Department of Justice (DOJ) is required to collect and report statistics on juvenile justice in California. Juvenile Justice in California 2024 provides insight into the juvenile justice process by reporting the number of arrests, referrals to probation departments, petitions filed, and dispositions for juveniles tried in juvenile and adult courts. Law enforcement agencies provide information to DOJ on the number of arrests. Probation departments and superior courts provide information to DOJ on the types of offenses and administrative actions taken by juvenile and adult courts.

Key Highlight 

• Juvenile arrest rates increased for all races/ethnicities in 2022. Compared to the previous year, the largest increases were seen among minority groups (54% for Blacks and 35% for Hispanics). Combined, both groups comprised 78% of all arrestees in 2022 (59% for Hispanics and 17% for Blacks).

Key Highlights 

• Juvenile arrests increased for all crime categories in 2022, ranging from 17% to 64%.
• Top cities with an increase in juvenile arrests are: Chula Vista, Poway, National City, Escondido, and Vista.
• Arrests decreased for all racial/ethnic groups, though Black and Hispanic individuals continued to be overrepresented in arrest statistics.

Key Highlights

• Risk assessments of participants indicated the program contributed to increased resiliency among them.
• Youth that completed the program during year 2 of services had slightly lower recidivism outcomes compared to year 1, with eight (5%) receiving a new referral within six months of program exit compared to 18 (9%) for year 1.
• Recidivism outcomes for youth that did not successfully complete the program during the second year were higher than those in the previous year, with 14 (42%) with a new referral within six months of exit compared to 13 (25%) in year 1.

Key Findings

• Provide evidence-based, person-centered services that reduce recidivism, assist with basic and immediate needs, and increase individual-level health, self-sufficiency, and positive personal relationships and community connections.
• Prioritize alternatives to incarceration as a public safety, equity, and health strategy, and evaluate rehabilitative services in these domains.

Key Highlights

• Of 502 youth referred to the program during the evaluation period, 354 (71%) agreed to participate. At the time of reporting, 256 (72%) of participants had exited the program. 
• A significant majority (79%) of those who exited the program successfully completed JDI. 
• 94% of youth had completed some or all their JDI goals, with most participating in pro-social services. Pre- and post-program assessments indicate that the program contributed to increased resiliency among youth.  
• Of the JDI youth eligible for the six-month post-program recidivism check, a smaller proportion of successful youth received a new referral compared to unsuccessful youth: seven (11%) of the 66 eligible successful youth received a new referral compared to four (19%) of the 21 eligible unsuccessful youth.  

Key Highlights

• By a margin of nearly 3 to
  1, victims believe that prison
  makes people more likely
  to commit crimes than to
  rehabilitate them.
• Seven in 10 victims prefer that
  prosecutors focus on solving
  neighborhood problems and
  stopping repeat crimes through
  rehabilitation, even if it means fewer convictions and prison sentences.
• Two out of three victims did
  not receive help following the
  incident, and those who did were
  far more likely to receive it from
  family and friends than the criminal justice system.
• By a margin of 7 to 1, victims
  prefer increased investments
  in crime prevention and
  programs for at-risk youth over
  more investments in prisons
  and jails.